From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Eddward DeVilla" Subject: Re: list format questions Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2007 09:40:26 -0600 Message-ID: References: <87sl2xz8hh.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ivadt-00049X-Ob for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:40:33 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Ivadq-00048l-7e for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:40:30 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ivadp-00048g-Cd for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:40:29 -0500 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.184]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Ivado-00009f-ML for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 10:40:28 -0500 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so3030277nfh for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2007 07:40:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87sl2xz8hh.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Content-Disposition: inline List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Bastien Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Nov 23, 2007 2:11 AM, Bastien wrote: > "Eddward DeVilla" writes: > > > - [ ] Q2 is a really, really, long Q and needs to be described in > > excruciating detail. > > Note that auto-refilling should already handle this. The thing is that > it outputs something like this: > > ,---- > | - [ ] Q2 is a really, really, long Q and needs to be described in > | excruciating detail. > `---- > > Not something like this: > > ,---- > | - [ ] Q2 is a really, really, long Q and needs to be described in > | excruciating detail. > `---- > > Which might be seen as more natural. But it's not obvious for me. Do > you think auto-refill should wrap the line like in the second example? > > (I'm not speaking about explicit refilling with `M-q' here.) Personally, I prefer the second example where the text aligns with text instead of the checkbox. I can live with either. Overall, I'd just like consistency with indenting. Tab goes to one position, M-q and auto-fill goes to another. Changing it so tab and auto-fill agree, but M-q doesn't isn't really an improvement in my eyes. I'd rather keep auto-fill and M-q the same and have tab be the odd man out. Edd